3of5Avery Williams, 5, of Castro Valley climbs a rock during a visit to Muir Woods.Photo: Lea Suzuki / The Chronicle

4of5Water moves around rocks in a stream at Muir Woods.Photo: Lea Suzuki / The Chronicle

5of5Visitors take in the view at Muir Woods National Monument.Photo: Lea Suzuki / The Chronicle

Three months ago, one of the nation’s largest programs for land conservation suffered a quiet demise.

The 53-year-old Land and Water Conservation Fund authorized the U.S. Treasury to direct millions of dollars from oil and gas royalties to the acquisition of parks, wilderness areas and historical sites in California and across the country.

But Congress allowed the program to expire Sept. 30, leaving no money coming in for new real estate purchases, the likes of which have given rise to Muir Woods, Point Reyes National Seashore, Mount Diablo State Park and Redwood National Park.

Last week, with an estimated $200 million lost — and counting — a group of lawmakers tried to revive the fund as part of the federal government’s year-end spending package. Political infighting, even before Congress and President Trump failed in reaching a budget deal, however, sank the effort, leaving an uncertain future for the program — and for conservation.

“We’re losing money every day that could be put to good use,” said Shelana deSilva, director of government affairs for the Save the Redwoods League, a San Francisco conservation group that has won grants from the fund to protect California wildlands.

Related Stories

“When people see that this program has been allowed to expire and is uncertain going forward, it has an impact on our ability to keep momentum,” deSilva said.

For the most part, the Land and Water Conservation Fund has enjoyed broad political support. The Senate first passed it with a 92-1 vote in 1964. Only a Louisiana Democrat opposed it.

The initiative has since been a popular way for the National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, as well as numerous state and local agencies, to acquire land for conservation and recreation, without leaning on taxpayers. The fund has helped preserve the Grand Canyon, Florida’s Everglades, areas along the Pacific Crest Trail, and Civil War battlefields in Gettysburg, Pa., and Fredericksburg, Va.

In 2015, the program began running into bumps. Several Republicans criticized it as an overplay of the government’s hand and a “slush fund” for environmental groups. The fund ultimately won a three-year renewal, setting the stage for this year’s showdown.

In September, lawmakers from both parties appeared unified on the need for an extension, but no consensus was reached on the terms for reauthorization. Advocates in Congress pledged to revisit the issue during budget talks this month.

While details of recent negotiations have been sparse, the House Committee on Natural Resources and Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources had been trying to permanently extend the fund as part of a package of public lands measures, despite disagreement about the scope of the program’s financing.

The program is bankrolled by a portion of receipts from companies that drill for offshore oil and gas in federal waters. Congress has had the discretion to direct up to $900 million into the Treasury fund each year, though rarely has that much been appropriated.

Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., the ranking member of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, has pushed to ensure full funding for a renewed program. Others, though, have raised concerns that too much has been spent on land conservation and not enough on maintaining the lands that are already protected.

Whether Congress had come up with a budget proposal that satisfied the president last week, the public lands package did not have the votes it needed to move forward.

“The fund is on everybody’s list of what should be done in the lame-duck session (of Congress),” said Kathy DeCoster, director of federal affairs at the Trust for Public Land, a San Francisco conservation advocacy group. “It’s bipartisan. It’s supported by the House and Senate. But it’s the end of the year, and nothing is moving on its own.”

The Land and Water Conservation Fund has sent money to virtually every county in the nationin the form of grants for land acquisition. Preference has gone to purchases that already had local, state or federal money in place but needed a bit more to close a deal.

Over its five decades, the program has delivered about $2.4 billion to California, according to the Land and Water Conservation Fund Coalition. It’s helped create local parks and pools, expand public access to popular fishing and boating spots, and conserve large swaths of local, state and federal wilderness.

Last year, the program brought in $22 million for Redwood National Park, Mojave Trails National Monument, and U.S. Forest Service tracts in the southern Sierra and Shasta County and two locally controlled parcels, including Save the Redwoods League’s Mailliard Ranch in Mendocino County.

Next year’s allocations will hinge on whether the fund is reauthorized and how quickly.

“It’s real money that’s going out the door now,” said Jonathan Asher, government relations representative for the Wilderness Society in Washington, D.C. “If they don’t get it done before this Congress is over, not only do we lose out on more money, but we have to start over with the next Congress.”

Kurtis Alexander is a general assignment reporter for The San Francisco Chronicle, frequently writing about water, wildfire, climate and the American West. His recent work has focused on the impacts of drought, the widening rural-urban divide and state and federal environmental policy.

Before joining the Chronicle, Alexander worked as a freelance writer and as a staff reporter for several media organizations, including The Fresno Bee and Bay Area News Group, writing about government, politics and the environment.